Hiyas:

Dunno if this is too late for some but I finally got some of my questions answered by FFG staff (Adam Sadler). Here's the quote:

My message:

Hi!

There have been a few postings in the Tannhauser Forum regarding questions answered by FFG. Some of them have caused quite a stir (= controversy (lol)). I'm asking stuff to clarify them. Couldya please help?

1. Regarding "Extra Ammunition:" Seems the answer provided, included that Extra Ammunion could be used for melee/hand to hand attacks... If this is right, could you please explain to me HOW is this possible (since most think the term "extra ammuntion" to be just extra cartridges/proyectiles, etc., for a ranged weapon)?

2a. I asked a few years back (?) about LOS, smoke & the different magickal/supernatural items/stuff that the Reich team has available, like Doom. I asked if these would be affected by Smoke/LOS affecting effects. The asnwer was a resounding "no." Now, I read (from the Forums) that this has changed & that Doom can be affected by Smoke), which is the right answer?

2b. To be absolutely clear on stuff, could you specifically detail which items/attacks/spells/stuff of a supernatural nature (the Patmos Amulet, Doom, the various arcana, for instance) are affected by Smoke, etc., Please?

Thank you!

L

Here the answer:

Hello Lete,

1. Thematically it may seem a little strange, but the way the rules are written, this token is discarded to allow the character to make an attack. The attack is not restricted to any specific weapon.

2. Smoke affects any kind of attack a character attempt in the path. Any piece of equipment that specifies an attack is affected by smoke unless otherwise noted. Patmos Amulet, for example, is an action and not an attack.

Thanks,

Adam Sadler
Managing Game Producer
Fantasy Flight Games
[email protected]

HtH

L

This seems a change from the original response that smoke does not effect an attack which does not require LOS.

I think that the answrs are not really contradictory. The way I understand it is, if Karl is out of the smoked path he can attack someone in the path, if he is inside the smoke he can't.

The disctinction between patmos and karl regarding smoke is new though...

Moebius said:

New but absolutely in line with the rules since Karl attacks with Doom and Patmos amulet uses an action to start a Mental duel which is not an attack. Smoke, as the rules state, only affects attacks, not other actions.

Moebius said:

I think the difference is this: Karl's attack (and any that does not worry about LOS at range) ignores the bit about attacking non-adjacent targets, but anyone in smoke is going to take the 2 dice penalty to their attack rolls.

The note about Hermann's equipment not making attacks, and therefore being immune to the effect of smoke is not new to me. I made note of it in Janurary. But Karl's Doom is a weapon, and I never considered it immune to smoke untill FFG ruled it so earlier this year. And now to confuse the issue further they've reversed course.

miah000.blogspot.com/2011/01/heizinger-201-intermediate-class.html

It's a long article but it's in there.

Sorry diversionArchitect, you are wrong. Doom doesn't ignore "the bit about attacking non-adjacent targets". Whether a weapon needs LOS or not is irrelevant when dealing with smoke. The rule just states that only adjacent targets may be attacked. Whoever in the FFG team ruled that Doom was unaffected by smoke ruled it wrong because it contradicted the rules concerning smoke. So now, when FFG reversed this decision, they maybe confused the issue, but nonetheless I think they did right in undoing this error.

eh maybe, but i'll continue to play it that way- mental attacks requiring you to see them seems pretty dumb when you can attack people you can't see... the dice penalty works though.

The original ruling was regarding models not needing LOS. Since smoke intuitively effects LOS, it would make sense to have models that ignore LOS to not be effected. We now have 2 rulings from FFG. The first one says that smoke does not effect the attack if LOS is not required and the second one that says it does.

There maybe an attempt going on to collate the rules so they are simpler. Certainly introducing exceptions into a game is always a problem, no matter how logical the exception may be.

Horsa said:

The first ruling was a mistake by somebody who ruled "intuitively", and the second (and newer) ruling is the correction made by somebody who ruled by the rule (I hope this makes sense in English.). It was clarified in 2 different official answers during the last weeks that all attacks are affected by smoke, even if they don't require LOS.

??! said:

eh affected by smoke doesn't say HOW it's affected by smoke, and since smoke has two ways it affects attacks... not trolling, just saying- completely unaffected was the first statement, and all attacks are affected by smoke was the second ruling

From the topic "Rules questions and answers from FFG":

Q : Additionally it seems it was ruled that Doom ignores smoke for the reason that it "does not require LOS". Doom is an attack, and it requires a target. According to smoke rules, it should not ignore smoke. Smoke rules do not talk about LOS.

A : Doom does not ignore smoke.

Please note that this question and answer specifically mentions Doom. It also mentions the older ruling and the argument that Doom doesn't need LOS. The answer is very clear - Doom does not ignore smoke, and thus is affected by smoke normally.

The question mentions the older statement, not the answer- and many times the answers from ffg have all but ignored the actual question- but let's say we'll agree to disagree.